This report identifies four principles of engagement at the core of the new agenda. These
principles are essential in defining how the new agriculture agenda should be promoted,
and in how the investment and policy options proposed under the new agenda should be
articulated. These principles are:
● Adapt approaches to diverse contexts.
● Build institutions and empower stakeholders.
● Support pro-poor international actions.
● Foster country-led partnerships.
Adapting approaches to diverse contexts…
Current reality in rural areas is defined by a highly diverse range of stakeholders
involved in agriculture – with considerable variation in their assets and access to markets
and the way institutions promote or constrain their interests. To address the needs of the
rural poor, policy needs to be informed by the dynamics in these processes. That, in turn,
needs to be based on an understanding of the place of agriculture in the rural economy and
in people’s livelihood strategies, in the productive potential of the land and labour involved
in agricultural production and the opportunities for agricultural enterprises.
A typology of five “rural worlds” can guide policy makers in understanding the diverse
rural and agricultural systems and dynamics and respond with appropriate pro-poor
policies. These rural world categories are not mutually exclusive. The typology of rural
worlds is used throughout this report as a guide rather than a rigid framework for
differentiating rural households. By using a more differentiated analysis based on people’s
livelihoods, it makes clear that poverty is located unevenly across and within rural
populations, that policy in and for agriculture affects different groups in different ways and
that the actions of one rural group can improve or impair the livelihoods of others.
● Rural World 1 – large-scale commercial agricultural households and enterprises.
● Rural World 2 – traditional agricultural households and enterprises, not internationally
competitive.
● Rural World 3 – subsistence agricultural households and micro-enterprises.
● Rural World 4 – landless rural households and micro-enterprises.
● Rural World 5 – chronically poor rural households, many no longer economically active.
Local contexts vary in their agro-ecological potential and in the accompanying
economic transformation – the contribution of agriculture gradually declines as the
economy diversifies. Public policy linked to agriculture should be tailored to a country’s
agro-ecological potential and the stage of transformation that it has attained. Policies need
to be flexible enough to adapt to success and allow for resources to be transferred to other
areas of the economy.
Building institutions and empowering stakeholders…
Much of the failure of agriculture to achieve its potential is institutional. Support by
the state has been unresponsive to the needs of the poor and inefficient in marketing
producers’ output, sometimes preventing the natural development of markets for
producers. Public institutions need to be strengthened in their capacity to develop an
appropriate blend of policies, regulatory frameworks and investments to re-launch the
agricultural sector. At the same time, the role of private sector institutions needs to be
strengthened to help address a range of problems including: limited access to financial
services including credit and risk management instruments, to key inputs such as seed
and fertiliser, and to output markets. These problems are often magnified for female
producers.
A strategy to strengthen institutions must also develop the skills, the capacity, and the
organisation of poor rural producers to maximise their input in the policy processes and
ensure accountability of policy makers. A major challenge, particularly in public extension
and research services, is the capacity of the institutions themselves to deliver clientfocused
services for households in Rural Worlds 2 and 3. Years of under-funding and
relative neglect have greatly weakened these institutions to deliver in the new agricultural
environment, which requires a demand-led rather than supply-led approach.
Supporting pro-poor international actions…
Three important processes can have major impacts on the successful implementation
of the new agenda for agriculture. One is the global trade negotiations to reduce
agricultural subsidies. A second is a major scaling up of aid in response to the challenge of
meeting the Millennium Development Goals. A third is the multi-donor commitment to
improve aid effectiveness, as set out by the Paris Declaration of March 2005. On agriculture
specifically, G8 heads agreed to support the New Partnership for Africa’s Development
(NEPAD)-inspired, comprehensive set of actions to “raise agricultural productivity,
strengthen urban-rural linkages and empower the poor”. The way these processes play out
in the short and medium terms will have an important bearing on conditions for enabling
pro-poor growth through agriculture.
Fostering country-led partnerships…
The Paris Declaration calls for an ambitious reform in the way aid is managed and
donors should be guided by these principles in helping countries unlock agriculture’s
potential contribution to pro-poor growth. National poverty reduction strategies (PRSs), the
main point of reference at the country level for operationalising the aid effectiveness
agenda, are critical for implementing the new agenda for agriculture. But agriculture and
rural development have been neglected in past PRSs, largely due to an inadequate
understanding of the agricultural and rural dimensions of poverty. A key challenge is to
redress the imbalance in the PRSs – to raise the profile of the productive sectors in general,
and of agriculture in particular. More specifically, attention must be given to effective
monitoring frameworks in supporting improved decision-making, flexible
implementation, and increased accountability. Development processes are the outcome of
power, knowledge and information relationships. It is therefore important to promote the
participation of all PRS stakeholders, including rural producers and their organisations, in
the development of policies and investments with the aim of influencing and eventually
re-orienting their implementation.
principles are essential in defining how the new agriculture agenda should be promoted,
and in how the investment and policy options proposed under the new agenda should be
articulated. These principles are:
● Adapt approaches to diverse contexts.
● Build institutions and empower stakeholders.
● Support pro-poor international actions.
● Foster country-led partnerships.
Adapting approaches to diverse contexts…
Current reality in rural areas is defined by a highly diverse range of stakeholders
involved in agriculture – with considerable variation in their assets and access to markets
and the way institutions promote or constrain their interests. To address the needs of the
rural poor, policy needs to be informed by the dynamics in these processes. That, in turn,
needs to be based on an understanding of the place of agriculture in the rural economy and
in people’s livelihood strategies, in the productive potential of the land and labour involved
in agricultural production and the opportunities for agricultural enterprises.
A typology of five “rural worlds” can guide policy makers in understanding the diverse
rural and agricultural systems and dynamics and respond with appropriate pro-poor
policies. These rural world categories are not mutually exclusive. The typology of rural
worlds is used throughout this report as a guide rather than a rigid framework for
differentiating rural households. By using a more differentiated analysis based on people’s
livelihoods, it makes clear that poverty is located unevenly across and within rural
populations, that policy in and for agriculture affects different groups in different ways and
that the actions of one rural group can improve or impair the livelihoods of others.
● Rural World 1 – large-scale commercial agricultural households and enterprises.
● Rural World 2 – traditional agricultural households and enterprises, not internationally
competitive.
● Rural World 3 – subsistence agricultural households and micro-enterprises.
● Rural World 4 – landless rural households and micro-enterprises.
● Rural World 5 – chronically poor rural households, many no longer economically active.
Local contexts vary in their agro-ecological potential and in the accompanying
economic transformation – the contribution of agriculture gradually declines as the
economy diversifies. Public policy linked to agriculture should be tailored to a country’s
agro-ecological potential and the stage of transformation that it has attained. Policies need
to be flexible enough to adapt to success and allow for resources to be transferred to other
areas of the economy.
Building institutions and empowering stakeholders…
Much of the failure of agriculture to achieve its potential is institutional. Support by
the state has been unresponsive to the needs of the poor and inefficient in marketing
producers’ output, sometimes preventing the natural development of markets for
producers. Public institutions need to be strengthened in their capacity to develop an
appropriate blend of policies, regulatory frameworks and investments to re-launch the
agricultural sector. At the same time, the role of private sector institutions needs to be
strengthened to help address a range of problems including: limited access to financial
services including credit and risk management instruments, to key inputs such as seed
and fertiliser, and to output markets. These problems are often magnified for female
producers.
A strategy to strengthen institutions must also develop the skills, the capacity, and the
organisation of poor rural producers to maximise their input in the policy processes and
ensure accountability of policy makers. A major challenge, particularly in public extension
and research services, is the capacity of the institutions themselves to deliver clientfocused
services for households in Rural Worlds 2 and 3. Years of under-funding and
relative neglect have greatly weakened these institutions to deliver in the new agricultural
environment, which requires a demand-led rather than supply-led approach.
Supporting pro-poor international actions…
Three important processes can have major impacts on the successful implementation
of the new agenda for agriculture. One is the global trade negotiations to reduce
agricultural subsidies. A second is a major scaling up of aid in response to the challenge of
meeting the Millennium Development Goals. A third is the multi-donor commitment to
improve aid effectiveness, as set out by the Paris Declaration of March 2005. On agriculture
specifically, G8 heads agreed to support the New Partnership for Africa’s Development
(NEPAD)-inspired, comprehensive set of actions to “raise agricultural productivity,
strengthen urban-rural linkages and empower the poor”. The way these processes play out
in the short and medium terms will have an important bearing on conditions for enabling
pro-poor growth through agriculture.
Fostering country-led partnerships…
The Paris Declaration calls for an ambitious reform in the way aid is managed and
donors should be guided by these principles in helping countries unlock agriculture’s
potential contribution to pro-poor growth. National poverty reduction strategies (PRSs), the
main point of reference at the country level for operationalising the aid effectiveness
agenda, are critical for implementing the new agenda for agriculture. But agriculture and
rural development have been neglected in past PRSs, largely due to an inadequate
understanding of the agricultural and rural dimensions of poverty. A key challenge is to
redress the imbalance in the PRSs – to raise the profile of the productive sectors in general,
and of agriculture in particular. More specifically, attention must be given to effective
monitoring frameworks in supporting improved decision-making, flexible
implementation, and increased accountability. Development processes are the outcome of
power, knowledge and information relationships. It is therefore important to promote the
participation of all PRS stakeholders, including rural producers and their organisations, in
the development of policies and investments with the aim of influencing and eventually
re-orienting their implementation.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar